About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
CNNW 18
MSNBCW 17
CNBC 16
MSNBC 4
FBC 3
CNN 2
WGN (CW) 2
WJZ (CBS) 1
WTTG 1
LANGUAGE
English 77
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 77 (some duplicates have been removed)
. and then this party that paraded around as the big deficit hawks, the guys that wanted to control spending, the only cuts they put on the table is playing at margins, increasing retirement age from 65 to 67 and adjusting rates for social security. this hasn't presented itself as a party that wants to cut spending. on one hand you have president obama's proposal, which most agree is the responsible way of raising the debt, raising rates. and responsible cuts on entitlements and discretionary spending versus republicans who are divided against something that is a chicken hawk when it comes to the deficits, that is the boehner approach, or the more extremist position which is absolutely nothing.ç so this is an extraordinary position for the republican party to have evolved into. >> you must respond to what julian just said. >> i like julian an awful lot but i think what he said is entirely wrong. it's fascinating president obama last july, july of 2011, said we can get $1.2 trillion in revenue where we don't have to raise marginal tax rates and close loopholes and julian says most economists agree, i
months noctober and november... the deficit, almost $300 billion, $4.8 billion a day. they had $30 billion in revenue. but the spending is up 3 times that much, $87 billion. how do woe stop the out-of- control spending? how can we get the budget deficit under control? can we do that for our children and grandchildren? >> we don't cut back on medicare and social security benefits that impact middle-class and working families. we start with the rich. that's what the voters wanted. they don't want -- middle-class families like mine, they don't want to see their taxes go up $2200 after january 1. they want to keep the tax deductions that they have and allow for people who can afford it to pay down some of this debt and deficit-- >>> trey -- [overlapping dialogue] >> eric: how do we pay this down? >> eric, what you are hearing is very unfortunate because you asked a specific question about cutting spending, democrats will not talk about it. she won't talk about it right now. -- >>> that's not my question. how do we stop the spending? >> how we stop the spenning is to over the dlif and h
would be good? >> we have an enormous deficit problem in the united states. nobody's dealt with it since bill clinton was president of the united states. there are a number of things we're going to have to do in order to meet our deficit. we're going to have to both raise taxes and cut spending. one of the areas we must cut spending is defense. there hasn't been serious cuts in defense in 30 years. the defense industry is well positioned. they have plants in something in over 300 districts. there's a lot of bipartisan defense spending. for example, the defense authorization bill that just passed yesterday in the senate gave the pentagon $17 billion more than they asked for. so to think that any industry or any taxpayer or any group of people who depend on government spending can be exempted from the serious problem that we have that's caused by this deficit is a mistake. everybody is going to have to pay for this. >> dawn, right or wrong, the defense industry has this reputation of being bloated, overcharging. are we at a point where we could afford to make cuts in defense spending to tr
million people and other deficits, close the huge deficits might not have a huge effect on the economy, however, if xes across the board and let's not forget the spending cuts that are ought maic in the defense industry, defense industry alone is looking at hundreds of thousands of job cuts next year with nos mandatory cuts go into effect. i'm not saying they are. so it's both cutting and taxing, we're too focus on the tax. bottom line, the government takes it out of the system cutting and raising taxes and the small or deficit. that means that people are going to be out of work, almost by definition in the short run. but in the long run it's a healthier economy that doesn't go down the path of greece. if the long run greece would have low unemployment, but they do not, but yes, we're going to go a percent, if it happens the worse case scenario, but in five years we won't be not able to borrow money. >> brenda: julian, you can go ahead and respond. >> first of l, the ernst & young study has been debunked over and ov. and number two, the bush tax cuts, if you let the bh tax cuts. the cr
to reduce the deficit, 63% said no. 86% of the ads run for obama were personal attacks on romney. he won a stunning mandate to not be romney. he did not run on the basis he was going to do massive new spending and the kind of tax increases, $1.6 trillion that he's now talking about. and at the same time that obama was elected president, the republican house, which had twice voted for a real budget -- remember, the president's budget he claims he has a mandate for was put up before the house and the democrats all voted against it. in the senate, the democrats didn't want to have anything to do with it. it's a little hard to argue, he had a mandate for something the rest of his party ran away from. >> well -- >> did not run ads on those issues. >> and, of course, it was a bit more complicated than that. but to your point about the exit polls, it's true, most people said that they didn't want tax increases to solve the deficit. what they said -- the majority, was they wanted both balanced. they wanted cuts and tax increases. which is what both john boehner and the president -- in very strid
in the house does not work in terms of reducing the deficit. >> congresswoman, we are watching the president on our screen at the business roundtable. there was an issue with the poll microphone for the president's address so they've handed him a different microphone, the leaders inside this room can hear exactly what the president is saying but his audio is too low for us to be able to share it with everybody. we're still working on that. when we see and hear about the fact this two-step plan getting something done for the middle class by the end of the year, does this set up the scenario we live in a perpetual state of fiscal cliff loopness, this is the same old dog and pony show every six months to a year fighting over the same things and not big, bold leadership? >> i hope not, certainly if it's not left up to president obama and congressional democrats. president obama proposed $4 trillion in deficit reduction, he has a balanced approach to take care of the middle class and that they have the certainty that they need that we make spending cuts that are significant, that make sense, and
. >> we are having the conversation because of the debt and deficit levels that the country is facing . someone on the democraticic side saying keep them and extend . republicans saying we have to cut somewhere. that's a real discussion. >> if i told you there was a program that cost you 30 billion and returned 18 billion to the economy and so had a net cost of 12 billion and supported 400,000 jobbings, you would say that is a good idea it is it not a matter of reducing the deficit because in congress we have people extending tax cuts that further blow a hole in the debt ceiling. >> i don't want to be cruel, christian. i don't want to be curt. every dollar comes back as a $1.90 a. forget about the stock market and investing and put our money in unemployment benefits. it is it resting on a complete fallacy of economics that conequals wealth. it is the same that pelosi and you. cash for clunkers and house stimulus . shovem ready stimulus jobbings. >> johnathon. why don't you listen to mark sand zandy of moody who advised john mccain's presidential anything. it is nothing to do with a pr
accomplish something. if you go back to before bush tax cuts, three quarters of the deficit is gone. it was supposed to sunset two years ago. when is a good time to let those things sunset? >> you're right, there's never a good time. >> maybe do something with the sequester, but let the tax cuts expire. >> although i have to say at this time it's too much i think in terms of the tax increase. >> we never want any pain. >> you're right. and we do need to get our fiscal house in order. but again, this is why the idea would be to come up with a longer term plan where you could scale some of these things in and you have to come up with a plan that you'll stick to, otherwise you get into this where -- >> we never stick to anything. if we get another deal that is toothless and -- >> the markets will become even more skeptical because we've seen this before. but i have to say two things. i don't necessarily buy into the deal that there's a fiscal slope. i have to say on the tax side, one of the things we keep talking about is the amt. boy, that's something that will -- >> howard goes on an
the deficit in the medium to long-term so as to avoid an immediate and dramatic cut in the short-term. yes, that's right. now, this may well present a problem for john boehner's caucus, because john boehner sent a letter to the president this week with his own plan, which advocates what just might be the least popular policy in american politics. okay, maybe that's hyperbole. but just be a tiny bit, i mean, mandatory gay marriage, in which every single married straight person had to immediately divorce their spouse, and accept a state-assigned same-gender spouse to replace them would probably be more popular than what john boehner proposed this week. what john boehner is advocating is making medicare available to fewer americans. as it happens, there is brand-new polling out today on how americans feel about the idea of congress using these deficit negotiations to make cuts to medicare. 79% of americans say they do not want congress to touch medicare in these deficit negotiations. 79%. if you want to get specific about john boehner's proposal, what he wants to do to medicare is to raise th
who actually came up with a plan to cut the deficit, a plan that everyone hailed as magnificent but no one wanted to adopt. >>> joining me now is cnn contributor will cain. he leans right. good morning, will. >> good morning. let me tell you something. you said the popularity of gangnam style knows no limits. i beg to differ. >> you do? >> i think we just found its limits, when 8-year-olds start doing gangnam style you can count on its popularity decreasing. we're about a year away from it being makarena. >> trying to get two sides come together to come to a deal on the fiscal cliff. >> i don't know about young people's abilities to force cats and dogs and democrats and republicans to come together to find a deal. he had a much more profound message than just simply dancing in that clip, in that psa essentially. he was trying to alert young people to the fact that old people, bluntly, are organized. look at the army of aarp representatives that ensure that programs like medicare and social security, programs that take up something like 50% of our federal budget will remain intac
discussed for more than a year and a half on the campaign trail, $4 trillion of balanced deficit reduction. weight not a real proposal what is john boehner sent to the white house which actually lowered rates for those at the top but asked the middle class to bear the entire burden of deficit reduction. that's not what the american people voted for. i mean if you look at even cnn's exit polls all over this country, upwards of 60, 65% of people voted for balanced deficit reduction, which means asking those at the top to pay their fair share. more people voted for that, the idea of that, then they voted for the president. so we need to look to the american people and look what they want on how to reduce the deficit. we have to do it in a balanced way and fair way. >> but if you look at polling and i know you don't always just go on polling, right, but polling is also -- you ask people what should be cut, 79% say don't cut medicare at all and i think that lots of things, democrats and republicans have said, that is on the table too. you don't always necessarily follow the polls when you liste
is it that the president's to achieve by this? if it is to reduce the deficit, it won't happen because if they take that money it, may run the government for 8 days. so we're not talking about an amount of money that's really going to fundamentally change either the ability to fund government or reduce the deficit. is it because he wants to punish people at the top? why? what is that to him? that doesn't help people at the bottom. if it did, then it could be justified. and i guess the president has yet to explain other than the fair share if you think about it top 10% pay a 7% of all the federal taxes so what is a fair share? >> geraldo: but that is what he campaigned on isn't that in itself its own justification be it -- albeit that it is 8 days out of 365? >> i think what he campaigned on certainly thats with a one of the things that he hammered of but hes said he was going to get the federal deficit down and federal spending under will cro. he said he was going to take on freely transparent. talk about a president who has broken campaign promises. what he needs to understand that his job is not
deficit in the next year. >> becky carroll told us cbs has an obligation to parents and families to expand access to as many high quality options as possible. >> coming up next, a deadly crash over night. white the man who survived is behind bars. >> a pair of shuttle police officers, it makes the holidays a memorable for two young children. this season, give craftsman tools from sears. like the new bolt on system with 9 performance, interchangeable heads... ... and make more, for less. craftsman. guys' favorites guaranteed. find it at sears. [ male announcer ] most people tend to think more about how they brush than what they brush with. until i show them this. the oral-b pro-health clinical brush. its pro-flex sides adjust to teeth and gums for a better clean. the pro-health clinical brush from oral-b. unwrap your paradise. soft, sweet coconut covered in rich, creamy chocolate. almond joy and mounds. unwrap paradise. this is america. we don't let frequent heartburn come between us and what we love. so if you're one of them people who gets heartb
thought you should take a look. it totals $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years. the part that stood out to us was $600 billion in proposed savings in medicare reforms. how? in part by raising the age of eligibility to 65 to maybe 67. turning down the gop proposal, dan pfieffer said, quote, it provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which medicare savings they would achieve." let's head now to the white house and dan lothian. the white house will not offer a counter proposal, right? what's going on here? >> reporter: well, you know, i think the white house is digging in. the president said early on in this process that he would only sit down and really move forward, negotiate on this in any meaningful way if the tax hikes for the wealthy expired. and republicans have been pushing back on that -- tax breaks rather for the wealthy expired and republicans have been pushing back on that, say they go believe that will be harmful for the economic recovery because wealthy americans are the ones who are creating the jobs and
that if we go over the cliff the deficit goes up. >> and the debt goes up. >> and the debt goes up. >> wrong. >> like our relationship people don't get it. >> deficit almost goes away. difference is about $8 trillion. >> about 10.5. >> join us tomorrow. right now it's time for "squawk on the street." >>> good wednesday morning. welcome to "squawk on the street." live at the nyse. what a morning shaping up here. a little data to look at. m&a. the president speaks to the business roundtable in a couple of hours. futures with modest gains. europe holding onto gains and china up nearly 3% over night as shanghai catches a break. our road map begins with a $20 billion deal. freeport mcmoran getting into the energy business making two acquisitions. plains exploration and mcmoran exploration. >>> concerns over the u.s. economy as adp misses estimates. the blame goes to superstorm sandy. goldman says the party is officially over for gold. >> starbucks at an investors conference will add 1,500 stores in the u.s. over the next five years. wait until you hear what they said about china. >> a big day in
's on a deficit crusade. david walker, taxes ranger, next. toward all your financial goals. a quick glance, and you can see if you're on track. when the conversation turns to knowing where you stand, turn to us. wells fargo advisors. the latest coffee machine from nespresso. modular. intuitive. combines espresso and fresh milk. the new u. nespresso. what else? available at these fine retailers. who have used androgel 1%, there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, pos
to the middle class. then we can work in earnest together to reduce the deficit in a balanced way that will make sure we don't first throw the middle class under the bus. that whatever we put forward have spending cuts and revenue that is going to take care of the middle class and make sure that we have spending cuts and revenue that ensures that they're fair and that the math works. there has been no evidence thus far that the republicans are interested in doing that. >> this has been the perfect opportunity for them to step forward and show some leadership. the majority of americans do want this right now. congresswoman, the president has asked you to stay on as dnc chair. what is the way forward for the democrats? what's happening here? >> well, we need to continue to focus on rebuilding our economy from the middle class out. president obama talked eloquently and passionately during the campaign about making sure that we can get a handle on this deficit, that we can rebuild our economy from the middle class out, that we can focus on creating jobs and getting the economy turned around, and tha
to see trillion deficits for as far as the eye can see. listen, washington's got a spending problem, not a revenue problem. >> joining me now are richard wolffe, the executive editor of msnbc.com and an msnbc political analyst, and robert reich, former labor secretary and a professor at the university of california berkeley. he is also the author of "beyond outrage." richard, i want to go to you first here. the president talked quite a bit in the election cycle. >> quite a bit. >> he did, period, about the fever breaking amongst republicans in congress . >> yes. >> it's been quite feverish of late, which is to say a lot of back and forth, a lot of hot air blown from the house caucus. i wonder if you think that fever might be breaking with the suggestion john boehner said, even if the president gets his way on tax rates, which would seem to open the door to that possibility. >> it's a bit to latch on to that. they cannot settle on a position. very different from the last time around. and it's true. the white house has said both publicly and privately, look, we're prepared to see all
the deficit down? >> greg: stop spending. >> bob: i get that. >> eric: i don't need 30 seconds. go over the fiscal cliff. take $1.2 trillion out of spending and tax hikes, stops the spending. mandatory spending cuts across the board. you know what? the only way to do it. only way to do it. everything else is chump change. >> dana: how do you deal with deficit reduction if you raise the taxes on a portion of the country that will pay for the government for 8.5 days? >> bob: you couple that with the social security adjustments and medicare. 'canes that is not what geithner put on the table. >> dana: that is going to be on -- >> bob: that is what is going to be on the table. >> dana: republicans held their feet on the fire. >> bob: whatever it took. >> greg: i used to think howard dean was a proctologist because he had his head up his butt but he pulled the curtain back. it's never about raising taxes on the rich because you run out of rich. >> andrea: right. >> greg: that is the point. >> eric: raise tax on everyone who pays taxes or everyone? everyone means the poor and 47% will start pa
medicare, medicaid and social security to be used as part of a deficit-reducing bill in such a short period of time. >> the clock is winding down toward the fiscal cliff. once considered an untouchable third rail, changes for social security and other so called entitlementeds are now being seriously discussed. >> we really have not begun to talk about real entitlement reforms. the only way to have a true avoidance is to mix an appropriate amount of revenues with true retirement reform. until the debate moves to that point, there's really no serious debate taking place. squeezing out savings from social security by changing the way inflation is calculated and possible means testing that could disqualify wealthier, older americans from the medicare program. lawmakers insist any changes will be done gradually and will not impact current retirees. but that's not soothing the fears of senior who is say inflation adjustments will have an immediate impact. >> to tell someone who's living on social security, one out of every flthree relies on just social security for their income, to tell them i'm
leaders. governors are concerned about the impact of deficit reduction measures on their state budgebu. the latest gop offer would overhaul the tax code, raise $800 billion in new revenue but seek $600 billion in health savings, net savings add up to about $2.2 trillion over ten years. boehner called the white house's original offer la la land and it does appear that even though at one point bowles endorsed a blueprint like this, he's trying to distance himself from it right now. >> the president got re-elected. he's claiming he got re-elected in part because he wants to tax that 2%. he cannot go back on that. in the meantime, congress most of the republicans signed the grover norquist pledge which says you cannot tax that 2% more than anybody else. you can't increase the taxes. so we're at a stalemate and someone has to give and i don't see anyone giving right now. >> bank of america today commented on the let's jump crowd. the bungee jump crowd for which they think is a scenario. >> you wonder how much of that is in negotiating position. embraced early on by senator schumer, new york
. >> do you briyou believe if you rote deficit -- two different ways. you either keep the government that you have and pay for it by raising taxes, or you kind of leave taxes where they are and you shrink government down to where it pays for it. does it matter for the future and for growth which way you do it in your view? >> it does. if you put it all into like a tightening, so how much tightening occurs in the economy that would slow the economy, it's far better to actually reduce government spending than it is to actually raise taxes. >> although that hurts the economy, too. >> everything hurts the economy. so it's a question of which is most -- or least harmful and that tends to be cutting government spending. >> but i do think it's -- >> although tim geithner would disagree with me. >> one side wants to keep the government and entitlements like we have it. and the other side wants to take away all the excess government -- >> i think both sides agree that you need to do both. just a question of how much. >> we need to do both to do a deal. i don't think both sides dwre that it's
's savings. >> with a trillion dollar deficit right now. so if you cut 94 billion and nothing else changes you barely dented the deficit. the other programs are growing. we'll not see spending decline. in fact we'll likely have a emergency spending bill for sandy that is 60 billion. 94 is gone right there. >> even with a trillion dollars in cuts federal spending is on the way up every year starting with 3.5 trillion this fiscal year. nearly 3.6 trillion in 2014. 4 trillion by 2016 and 5 trillion by 2021. the cbo says even allowing 5 trillion in tax increases to hit the economy the next decade the federal government still spends $2.3 trillion more than it takes in. back to you. melissa: oh, rich edson thanks so much. adam: you think with the physical problems the country faces zooming at us like a 1959 he had sell going at us on a one way treat there would be sense of urgency. president obama has no meetings, no public appearances on the issue planned at least so far today. brad blakeman is not surprised. he says it is a clear sign we're going to go straight over the fiscal cliff. blakeman
where you get a down payment in 2013 which brings the deficit to gdp ratio down from 7% down to 6%. if we could do that along with some long-term agreement we'll get another trillion out of entitlements or a trillion from taxes or somewhere else but a range of what we'll do in 2013 where we'll get the money for the rest of the sort of fiscal issues over the next few years but some down payment. we get the down payment and it's a reasonable downappointment not one that will crush the economy, i think the market could react very well to that. >> what's your opinion on what's going on in the economy ex-sandy? you were saying a better jobs number would show the economy is resilient. do you think it is resilient, if it doing, if you can take out the effects of the hurricane, better than people think? >> i think it's got so much potential. i see all the hesitancy here. but pent-up demand is forcing the housing market higher. pent-up demand is forcing the vehicle market higher. consumer finances are very much improved. people have locked in the 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages at a wonderfu
, not just to avoid the damage of the sequester but to help reduce our long-term deficit. >> i was disappointed by the president's proposal. i think it is essentially a rerun of his budget proposal. the revenue proposals are $1.6 trillion in revenue and tax increases. it's a massive tax increase. but also not significant and meaningful in entitlement reforms. >> so, anna, i hear comments like those and remarks by john boehner and the president of the united states and i wonder after the election, did we learn anything? because i -- my reading on the election was that the people, the voters wanted compromise. and for the people in washington to talk to each other not at each other. that still appears to be what they're doing, no? >> i think right after the election that was the message that even president obama and john boehner and the entire leadership, we saw that incredible image of the minority and majority leaders on both houses come out saying things that sounded like they were going to cooperate. but, you know, only in washington can that mean nothing quickly. but i do th
anything on entitlements, would prefer frankly not to have to do anything on some of these debt and deficit problems. if you look at the numbers, then medicare in particular, will run out of money and we will not be able to sustain that program, no matter how much taxes go up. i mean it's not an option for us to just sit by and do nothing. >> that was president obama in the summer of 2011 speaking the hard truths about entitlements. it did not exactly play well for him then and he's been largely quiet on the issue since, perhaps because for both parties talk of cutting social security and medicare hurts a lot. >> there's a pain point that democrats have to reach as well. it's not just republicans. that both sides have to be able to get to the end of this things and say, yes, the president won re-election but there is nobody that gets away with this thing without feeling pain. >> and there are some on the left who hope to get through this without having to go under the knife. adam green, co-founder of the progressive change campaign says -- yesterday on abc's "this week" congressman keith el
's the federal deficit. it's the federal debt, which is a huge risk for national security. right now the defense department has taken, as i said, about can half a trillion dollars of deduction in the first round but the strategy aligns to the point we can meet national security objectives and still accomplish or make though cuts. if you start putting another half a trillion on top of, that you shatter the strategy. and then national security has to be free thought. i propose we need more of a fiscal stairstep reduction so that reductions can be made with strategy in mind. strategy and national security needs have got to be tweaked and done in concert. that's the way to do this. and i think in the end, you know, you're going to have to see reduction -- you're going to have to see more reductions in defense, but hopefully nowhere near the levels that the fiscal cliff and sequestration would impose. >> so, are employees expecting this? i mean, have you to be living under a rock not to see what's going on with the fiscal cliff, but are you planning on laying off employees if sequestration is trigger
to bring in a man who says president obama's plan would create jobs and cut the deficit. he's democratic congressman chris van hollen, maryland, ranking member of the house budget committee. welcome to you, sir. you said today -- >> good to be with you. >> good to be with you, too. we're in the fourth quarter as we approach the fiscal cliff. if we can deliver like rg iii delivers, we'll be doing well. the question i would ask is why the hell are we in the fourth quarter? why wasn't this done in the first quarter? >> well, piers, as you know, there were a number of efforts before the election to get this done and there were major differences between the parties, and those parties became a big part of the conversation during the presidential debate. the president could not have been clearer that he wanted to do two things. he wanted to boost economic growth by doing things like investing in our infrastructure which used to be a bipartisan idea, but also, extending middle class tax cuts and as you said, asking the wealthiest to pay a little bit more to reduce the deficit. that was part of t
the president by giving him his own indian name running deficit. [ laughter ] >> the nation's debt is no laughing matter. lou dobbs will tell you why we are all in grave danger because of out-of-control government spending. three wise men, what did they do? >> jesse watters quizes the folks about christmas. >> they brought frankincense, miles an mur and. >> baby diapers? >> a wild wild waters world upcoming. >> caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone from california. factor begins right now. hi i'm bill o'reilly reporting from los angeles, thanks for watching us tonight. i'm here to do the leno program this evening. during the long flight across country, i had a chance to analyze something very important to you. all of us needs to wise up and fast. you may have heard the story of new york city police officer who spent $100 ofmoney t man some boots. that man jeffrey hillman lying in the street when officer deprimo spotted him. >> it was extremely cold that night and you see this gentleman i tried to offer him to buy a pair of socks he said no officer god bless you. thank yo
? >> well, issues like making sure we can pass a balanced approach to deficit reduction. we know we need to have some significance spending cuts. we know that we need to generate some revenue, and we clearly as a result of this election know that the american people support increasing taxes through tax rate increases on the wealthiest 2% of americans. those middle class tax cuts in that legislation would protect the tax cuts for 98% of americans and 97% of small businesses. that, as we are in the midst of the holiday season, is absolutely essential to continuing to get our economy turned around and focus on job creation. >> "the new york times" reporting today that negotiations are now down to just two people. the president, the house speaker. we know that some senate democrats dispute this. what do you think about this point with regard to the negotiations and who's in the room? >> i know that the president and his advisers are focused on making sure that in the discussions that they have with both the house and the senate that whatever plan they agree to includes a balanced approach. o
is preposterous when you're running trillion dollar deficit. and just to add insult, and here's the insult, he demands congress give up the power to control the deficit. that's obviously meanlt to humiliate the republicans. it's a non-starter. it's not acceptable. it's a way of saying to boehner you want to hand me your sword, you want to hand me your shirt? i want your trousers as well. the white house is not budging, and everybody's waiting, meaning the media, the administration are waiting for republicans to cave. >> look. i agree totally with you and their posture, their public posture appears that they're going that way. i'll give you a quick example. when john boehner started to answer the other day and he said well, our plan is to raise revenues on the rich, he was co opting barack obama's language and we read this week about the purging and the removal of conservatives and tea party members from their committee assignments because they didn't vote the way speaker boehner wants. that seems to me to be evidence that a surrender is coming. >> well, i'm not sure it's the appointments so mu
the math. they say that as part of the deal, and they are talking about $4 trillion in deficit reduction, that if you close the loopholes and you're not going to close the loopholes for the middle class, you're just not going to get enough money, 400, $500 billion. the president says he wants $1.6 trillion. my guess is he would probably settle for around a trillion. so -- and in addition, look, the president campaigned, i mean, certainly made it no secret that was one of the big issues between him and romney. he campaigned on raising the tax rates on the top 2%. people making over $250,000. he won. he thinks he's got a mandate on that issue. >> hopefully we'll hear something today, a little bit of wiggle room, i hope. i also wanted to ask about the removal of four republicans from key committees. what is that all about? >> well, this is in the house. this is speaker john boehner, and, you know, he's trying to get people behind him and he's basically saying to some of the conservatives who have been off the reservation, and he's had a big problem. one of his problems is he's got to deal w
by giving him his own indian name running deficit. [ laughter ] >> the nation's debt is no laughing matter. lou dobbs will tell you why we are all in grave danger because of out-of-control government spending. three wise men, what did they do? >> jesse watters quizes the folks about christmas. >> they brought frankincense, miles an mur and. >> baby diapers? >> a wild wild waters world upcoming. >> caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone from california. factor begins right now. hi i'm bill o'reilly reporting from los angeles, thanks for watching us tonight. i'm here to do the leno program this evening. during the long flight across country, i had a chance to analyze something very important to you. all of us needs to wise up and fast. you may have heard the story of new york city police officer who spent $100 of his own money to give bare foot man some boots. that man jeffrey hillman lying in the street when officer deprimo spotted him. >> it was extremely cold that night and you see this gentleman i tried to offer him to buy a pair of socks he said no officer god bless you. thank
for a couple of years about tax rates, about entitlement spending, about deficits that have topped $1 trillion throughout the obama presidency. i suspect all of them eventually are going to get settled but they aren't going to get settled at the same time, including the debt limit increase. >> john harwood, thank you. >>> let's see where we do stand on the fiscal cliff deal. let's look at our "rise above" meter. time to stop talking and start actle. we were at a half-way point, now back to a quarter on the "rise above" meter, closing to no deal than deal. >>> lawmakers trying to solve the fiscal cliff issue. police trying to solve a burglary at the home of california congressman darrel issa. according to reports, more than 50 pieces of jewelry worth about $100,000 were stolen from the congressman's home on november 29th. watches, earrings, rings, bracelets involved and what issa spokesperson calls irreplaceable family air looms. >>> to the jobs report today. super storm sandy slammed the east coast but it looks like it didn't have all that much impact on the labor market. november jobs numbers
the deficit and putts on a path to long-term stability. what i need, what the country needs what the business community needs in order to get to where we need to be is an acknowledgement that folks like me can afford to pay a little bit higher rate you if we combine that with a tax reform process and entitlement reform. then we can get a $4 trillion deficit reduction package. >> you can begin to see, if you take $400 billion in deductions, combine that with a partial increase in the top rate, remember, the president proposed to get about $1 trillion from raising the top rate to 396, you can see how some of the elements of a revenue package come together. one other note from that interview, tyler and sue, was that the president was asked will you bring a big business executive into your cabinet? he said i would love to. i'm in constant conversation. one of the challenges, though, is the confirmation process, which is difficult and forbidding for a lot of those business executives to go through. >>> it is, indeed, john. from what you heard from the president today, do you sense that they are in
-chair of the president's deficit commission, was on the "today" show this morning and he said all this talk about either side being able to go off the cliff is ridiculous. let me play that for you. >> when you have leaders of parties and people from the administration saying i think it would be to the advantage of the democrats to go off the cliff or i think it will be advantage to the republicans to go off the cliff or the president to go off the cliff, that's like betting your country. there's stupidity involved in that. this is big time stuff. >> and there's also a question of how far the white house is willing to go to protect middle class tax cuts. are they willing to limit unemployment insurance, give up infrastructure spending, which is something the president has been talking about from the beginning, payroll tax cut. what's the white house plan here? >> well, alan simpson in addition to being an excellent dancer is a very shrewd political analyst. >> very hip, alan simpson. >> very, very, very good dancer recently. but, look, i think people talk in terms of political advantage and clearly the p
for the fanel to advance a deal with democrats to cut deficits but -- >> grover norquist drowns himself in a bathtub. after he hears that. >> he made me do it. >> stephanie: two of the republicans that vote most often against boehner. boehner is trying to control his caucus. >> i'll be really surprised -- >> stephanie: these two guys, whatever their names are they said despite sweeping changes to medicare and medicaid, paul ryan's budget didn't make deep enough cuts to entitlement. those guys. yeah, that wasn't quite mean enough. [ applause ] >> i would be surprised if boehner kept his leadership position in the next congress. >> stephanie: really? >> yeah. because he's not -- >> stephanie: i picture eric cantor rubbing his hands together like snidely whiplash. >> he can't keep the caucus together. the republicans are famous for staying together. he can't keep them together. >> flabbergasted! >> that's doing a bad job. >> stephanie: he's flabbergasted at his own caucus. [mumbling] >> stephanie: by the way doesn't
barack obama suppresses his case today for a tax hike to help reduce the deficit. we are not insisting on rates just out of spite or any kind of partisan victory but rather because we need to raise a certain amount of revenue. >> and he made that pitch to several wealthy ceos he wants to raise taxes on the top 2 percent of income earners and he believes this will help raise the government's 16 trillion dollar debt coupled with spending cuts but the republican controlled house says the president has not responded to their latest proposal. >> i think we made a good-faith offer to avert the fiscal crisis and that offer included significant spending cuts and reforms and it included additional revenue and frankly it was the balanced approach mr. president has been asking for. erick kanter announced today there will be no adjournment into a credible solution to the fiscal cliff is found. >> house lawmakers proposed a bill today they claim will bring the costs under control and provide a safe retirement, it creates two groups of public employees those hired before 2011 and those hired sin
is a deficit hawk. liberal, but he is a deficit hawk. he doesn't say maybe if we can't get a deal together, maybe we'd be okay with the fiscal cliff. he says that is the best deal for everyone, the best deal for progressives, just to do it. to go back to the clinton era rates. you get rid of three quarters of the deficit just on tax increases at that point. >> and he says you get defense cuts. >> you can't get defense cuts any other way. and he's not the only one. there's a lot of people on the left and there's quite a few people on the right. i'm glad you're optimistic and a lot of ceos and guys in your position -- if you run a company, you don't need consumers petrified and business people petrified. this is the last thing we need if you run a company. i understand you have a horse in the game. >> but you also have the double trigger. if you go over the cliff, we've got the debt ceiling fight right afterwards. it's not like that's six months down the line. that's in if first month, six weeks of the new year. >> the other thing, depending on where you stand, the idea that we just get rid
warned that he won't meet his deficit targets for austerity will have to continue. we expect higher taxes on the rich tomorrow, cuts in public spending, and in this environment the multinationals like google, amazon, starbucks, are very firmly in the firing line. after all what better than to attack big corporate america. and they're being told, smell the coffee. i can play that game, too, michael. >> wake up and smell the coffee. always good to see you, mr. quest. always making it simple for us. richard quest in london. probably didn't pay for that coffee. >>> over the weekend, the palestinians celebrated their new status recognized by the united nations. the joy short-lived. how israel's decision to pursue even more settlements in the west bank and east jerusalem may kill any hopes of peace. we'll dive deep lie into this issue. >>> rp says it's not changing plans for the controversial housing development in east of jerusalem also developments in east jerusalem. this is despite getting a diplomatic mackdown recently from australia, five european countries and the united states bought in
for the past two deficits. i d't believe weevil have the money for the current spending related to sandy. there's not a tax for that, pretty sure. to the point to have the additional costs which would have to be hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars, where's that's coming from? unless they use taxes on fue to be the solution, that, at least, in theory, does not cost the government money. it doesn't meant passes or have other effects. neil: cost money? >> not economy, but it will not look like they need o spend to solve the problem if that's the way it goes. neil: [inaudible] >> yeah, we're broke. we're turn your pockets inside out, it's over. no money. neil: you got the point across. thank you, both, very much. washington, we have a problem. don't think so? here's it's straight from the real guys behind this, after this. ♪ >> in is houston, say again, please. >> houston, we have a problem. we have a main bolt, we have a lot of thruster, activity, houston. just went offline. it's the little things in life that make me smile. spending the day with my niece. i don't use super poligrip fo
a significant, balanced approach to reduce our deficit our nation needs. so, wolf, here at the white house, they received this letter earlier in the day. they've had time to process it and clearly the white house not seeing this as something that they want to even bargain with. they've been saying that the next move is up to speaker boehner. and they wanted to see specific details so that they could actually begin the negotiations. what we see in this statement is that they feel he did not provide those details. now, the speaker and the president will see each other tonight we think at a holiday reception here at the white house. we'll see if they will actually discuss this, wolf. >> all right. the republicans hated the democratic initial proposal. the white house hates the republican counterproposal. we'll have much more in our next hour, jessica, thank you. >>> and you're in "the situation room." happening now, president obama issued a clear warning to the president bashar al assad. there will be consequences if you use chemical weapons against your own people. new details of the tragedy
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 77 (some duplicates have been removed)